people. plus, the national rifle association has gone silent since the newtown massacre. are they laying low hoping the country's outrage subsides? they're hibernating. they're in their bunker now. we'll see what they're up to. ensure the domestic new details from the 2012 tranquility. election. let's play "hardball." yes, we now know how the obama campaign responded behind the scenes after the president bombed in that first debate. we've got the authors of politico's new ebook on the campaign's final days. let me finish with why no ♪ one on the right ever blames president obama or any president good evening. i'm chris matthews in new york. let me start tonight by talking for these shooting sprees, about america. because they don't want them to do anything about them. the preamble of our constitution addresses two areas of security. this is "hardball," the place for politics. one is to provide for the common progressive insurance. defense against foreign enemies. you know, from our 4,000 television commercials. the second is to ensure domestic tranquility from violence from yep, there i am with flo. within. it is impossible to imagine the hoo-hoo! watch it! congress of the united states [chuckles] anyhoo, 3 million people switched to me last year, ignoring the first of these imperatives. saving an average of $475. an act of omission that would leave us open to foreign attack [sigh] it feels good to help people save... and invasion. tragically, we can't say the with great discounts like safe driver, multicar, same about attacks on the

country's domestic tranquility. and multipolicy. what has the congress done to so call me today. you'll be glad you did. protect the country? cannonbox! nothing. [splash!] and here's the question. when will we refuse as citizens to settle for, accept, live with a congress that fails to act in the face of such a demonstrated vulnerability? if not now, after this, when? next week? next month? next year? next what? and if not us, who in this world is going to demand action to protect americans? joining me now is u.s. senator dick durbin of illinois. i want to read something from you which is very impressive, and it's in the op-ed pages of "the chicago tribune." quote, what holds us back are political organizations that are well-funded, well-organized, and determined to resist even reasonable limitations. we're thrilled to report there's a close political right now some very good news from the middle east. parallel between the gridlock in our nbc colleague, the great washington on dealing with our chief foreign correspondent economy and national debt and richard engel, and his crew are the eerie silence in congress as free after being held captive in syria for five days. the list of horrific gun crimes grows by the day. they were abducted by a group of gunmen after they drove through senator durbin, thank you. what they thought was i know you have got a good heart rebel-controlled territory.

on this as well as a good head about fiscal matters. they escaped during a firefight between their captors and the what's wrong with the congress when it comes to protecting, rebels. ensuring the domestic and they safely reached turkey tranquility? today. this morning on the "today" show, engel described the kinds of things he and his crew were >> well, there's a legitimate subjected to by their concern about our second kidnappers. amendment, chris. you understand that part. but there's also a very strong >> they kept us blindfolded, political force that is trying bound. to push forward, primarily for we weren't physically beaten or tortured. the dealers and manufacturers, it was a lot of psychological an agenda that will sell more torture, threats of being firearms and more sophisticated killed. they made us choose which one of firearms, more expensive us would be shot first, and when we refused, there were mock firearms, and that has really shootings. >> mock shootings. richard engel is back with us. dominated the scene. he's one of the best reporters around the world regularly if you asked who is the head of the alcohol, tobacco, and risking his life to report from war zones across the middle firearms division of the department of defense, you would east. we're very happy he's safe and have to learn, unfortunately, that for literally years there's sound tonight, and we'll be right back.  not been a head. the nra and gun lobbyists successfully even stopped the basic organization in charge of enforcement of our gun laws in america. >> when the late charlton heston would run that ad for the nra,

he would wave some old musket near and say, from my cold dead hands, which i thought was awful to begin with, the absolute nature of that demand that they hold onto the gun, but he never waved an ak-47, never showed a 30-round clip in the air with a big banana. he never did that because people don't think of that as american revolution era. they think of that as state of the art mass killing. >> of course it is. and those are military weapons, military assault weapons. and, you know, thank goodness law enforcement turned up in newtown when it did or the list of children who had been killed and teachers would have been much, much longer. think about what happened in aurora, colorado. that man stood in front of a crowded theater spraying that audience with one of these assault weapons, and the only thing that stopped him emptying the 100 cartridges that he had to shoot was it jammed. if it hadn't jammed, the death toll would have been even higher. >> you know, it's not hopeless though. you talked about the second amendment, but, look, back in 1934 when we had machine gun kelly and all the guys in shoegs chicago. we had the whole prohibition era encouraging a certain kind of

crime, rum running, et cetera. here is the question. back then the congress had the guts to outlaw automatic weapons, machine guns. basically they did. they were heavily regulated. almost to the point of you don't find them around. here is the question, why can't congress do the same thing with semiautomatics? i know we have got millions of them and can't we start to regulate? we don't have to regulate a shotgun or a regular pistol, a revolver or anything, but if you go into the semiautomatic level, why don't we say that's like the automatic level? just go with that? >> i can tell you this, chris -- >> the courts would have to approve it because they approved the earlier one, didn't they? isn't there a precedent? >> even after the heller decision, the supreme court told us there were reasonable limits that congress could impose when it came to firearms. there are two groups that i think are essential to the success of this effort. first, sportsmen and hunters. let me tell you, chris, i know welcome back to "hardball." plenty of them in my family and by most accounts the two sides in the fiscal cliff talks are all around downstate illinois. moving closer and closer to striking a deal. they're good people. well, can they do it on time? they're good citizens. look, see where the sides stand they hate what happened in newtown, connecticut, as much as right now. we do. on the one hand, you have we need them as part of this president obama proposing new revenues of $1.2 trillion, conversation.

and the second group that has to that's 1.2, and spending cuts of step up is law enforcement. the same, $1.2 trillion. there was a time when they spoke out against these terrible the offer from speaker boehner is not far off. weapons of death. he's proposing a revenue increase of just $1 trillion and we need them again to be part of this conversation. $1 trillion in spending cuts. >> well, i would ask why would anybody out there want the he's a smaller package than the president. criminal to be heavier armed than the policeman? in terms of who would pay their he's got a little 9 millimeter tax rates, see them go up to the or .38 police special, and clinton level rates, president somebody comes in with an assault rifle. obama's latest offer talks about people making over $400,000. let's go back to the sportsmen. do you think the sportsmen you he's moved up from $250,000 to $400,000. know and are organized in illinois, do you think they which he's been pushing. would support a limit on the speaker boehner wants those tax number of rounds in a clip? hikes to affect only people making over $1 million. >> i think they would. you look at the polls of are the differences bridgeable? sportsmen and hunters, people kelly o'donnell, it's a great who own guns for those purposes question. and self-defense, overwhelmingly they're for reasonable limitations. is this arithmetic ahead of us you ask them pointblank, should we have a background check to or does one side have to do better than the other in terms make sure that unstable of closing in on the middle ground? individuals don't get their hands on a firearm, and they say of course. why would we want that to >> reporter: all the dance we're seeing does give us some signs happen? of optimism. there is a common ground here. but we need to hear their both sides seem to be making voices. some concessions. many are speaking for them in the loudest voices of complaint washington who really don't tend to be coming from people understand their values. not directly in the room. we're hearing good things from >> let me ask you about the the white house and the comparison you drew because i hope we're in the 11th hour of the fiscal crisis, fiscal cliff speaker's office about the

potential for a deal but still it's tense. debates and negotiations. tell me about that parallel what you have with republicans between the unwillingness to is a change sort of in tone when deal with -- you very they are now framing this issue as tax increases will happen courageously supported simpson/bowles. it seems people on the left and january 1st as being baked in, in the words of the speaker, so right have a hard time making those kind of compromises. the strategy for republicans is how is that similar to what to try to save as many americans we're dealing with in the gun issue? from a tax increase as possible. >> you worked around here, you know how this works. that's where you get the $1 people go back to their home million threshold. districts, and people in the gun lobbies will say, listen, we the white house came back, of course, at $400,000, and perhaps have a scorecard here, and we're you can see they aren't in going to watch every single vote, and you better be right, numbers that far off. buddy. you better score an "a" or we're the details, of course, are difficult. going to defeat you in the next we expect that there will be a election. house vote on the ideas put it's the same mentality that drove the grover norquist forward by the speaker, the pledge. so-called plan "b" on thursday. you pledge i'll be there with an "a" no matter what. that's a way to sort of put a i can't tell you how many times marker in the sand of what can i have looked at my colleagues be passed through the house. in the eye after they cast one of these crazy votes on guns and that is both a message idea as they shrug their shoulders and well as a tactical move to try say, i live in a pretty to send a signal to the white house of what might be achievable in dealing with the conservative area. the honest answer is even in conservative areas people are house of representatives. >> but won't the republicans sensible and rational, and if we just all vote for the million dollar cutoff and then say come up with something that's reasonable that doesn't inhibit that's the best deal we can get? basic sportsmen and hunters and i hate to be cynical, but they'll obviously choose the softer way out only affecting a

self-defense, we're going to few people. have strong support across party lines. there's only, what, 400,000 >> governor adlai stevenson of people in the country that make illinois once said it's the duty $1 million a year. of leaders to lead. so that's a nicer crowd to go after than to go after the far thank you very much, dick durbin. larger crowd. you're a leader. thanks for joining us and merry so won't they just try to signal christmas to you. >> thanks, chris. the easy way out and then say that's the only way out? with me is dana milbank. dana, thank you. you're a sarcastic fellow, and i >> reporter: well, by taking the enjoy that in you, but let's get vote in two steps, one on the to the heart of this thing. threshold of $250,000 where the what's wrong with the congress? president originally set it and a vote on the $1 million level, why can't it do anything? i want to read from your column. if you believe the current they'll try to make the argument national mood will be the same, that the 250 cannot pass. you have another thing coming. are we in a mood of change, of demand, that action can be and by doing that they hope to move a little bit further. taken? it's part of the strategy. number of bullets of rounds in a we expect that it will be busy clip. the next few days, but there are still signs of optimism. do we really want to have a kid, a crazy person wandering around some democrats have said this with a clip of 30 bullets in it, plan "b" idea is really boehner backing away from the talks. especially bullets that have been worked on to make sure they they are sort of saying that it explode as widely as possible is likely he will step away as inside the human body? he did during the debt ceiling. republicans are saying, no, >> chris, i mean, this is one of those issues that defies any they're still working at it, but sarcasm or irony, and it does this is, i think, the time where they're just trying to make the sort of just bring out anger, moves to see who is dancing and i was writing today about, around the ring and can land a better punch. you know, the president saying >> merry christmas, kelly. >> merry christmas and happy in the coming weeks. birthday, chris. >> thanks, dear. now, that's perfectly sensible, i think we're going to make it.

i have been saying this for a while. on the one hand, to say that i think the grown-ups will be he's going to take action in the grown-ups. we have the former chair of the coming weeks and to ask his cabinet to come up with republican national committee and msnbc political analyst proposals. michael steele, also democratic we've got christmas coming, we've got the fiscal cliff strategist chris kofinis. debate. michael, do you think the two but we've seen this movie parties will agree to release before, and what happens is the nra and its allies are back on people and their parties, the moderates and the center left their heels. some action could be taken. and center right, to cut a deal then they regain their balance, and not require everybody to and by the time people get vote in lockstep in the two parties? around to doing something like >> i do, chris. reinstating the assault weapons i think that's part of the strategy that boehner and the ban, the support is gone for it. president, quite frankly, have and you see it happening. been putting in place. the nra is saying they're going from what i understand, the to have their roll-out of white house and boehner through whatever their announcement is the speaker's office have going to be on friday. already begun to lay down that patchwork for nancy pelosi to you can be sure they're not going to say let's reduce the bring some people to the center magazine capacity and have an assault weapons ban. and for boehner to do the same. >> they're going to do something on mental illness funding. >> of course. part of that, as kelly just >> they're going to hide from mentioned, was the plan "b." the gun issue so far you won't believe it. we set the outliers, $1 million. >> of course. the republicans who have not -- who have been kind of quiet are the president raised his number going to rally around that point from $250,000 to $400,000. of view. they're feeling out where in some of the program democrats -- their caucus, then begin to pull we have had about a half dozen those votes to get this deal done, so, you know, it's really in the senate have come out and said, well, maybe we'll be open to something. interesting, but it's an they're going to be reined back in, too. opportunistic moment for both of if you don't seize the these gentlemen, and i think

initiative, if you don't take they're playing their cards advantage of when the nra is pretty well so far. back on its heels, this isn't >> what's the deal breaker on going to happen, and we're going the liberal side, chris? to be dealing with the same what is it that you would find if it breaks, the deal doesn't thing in a few months. hold over the weekend or through >> here is a smart senator talking, mark warner from virginia, a moderate democrat. the weekend, on the liberal he's joined the chorus of side? pro-gun democrats who is willing is it the pressing around with to look at changes in gun the cpi for social security, carving that down a bit, the safety. payments you get when they let's listen to the senator from adjust it for inflation? virginia. >> i believe every american has is that the hardest thing to second amendment rights and that the ability to hunt is part of sell if you're the president to our culture. the left? >> you know, if the art of compromise is about sharing i have had an nra rating of an pain, it all depends on how much "a," but, you know, enough is pain you're willing to accept. i think for those on the left, you know, cpi is going to be a enough. very difficult pill to swallow. if nothing else, i mean, i know i have got -- i'm a father of from my time on the hill, you three daughters, and this weekend they all said, dad, you know, the aarp responded pretty know, how can this go on? strongly when that came up in any kind of discussions. and i, like i think most of us, and so you're going to have realize that there are ways to people i think mobilize. i think it depends how the numbers are structured and get to rational gun control. there are ways to grapple with where, you know, where is this revenue coming from and how the cpi itself is structured. the obvious challenges of mental illness. so the devil is in the details here -- >> those wonderful words in the >> but aarp is going to oppose

bible about you must become like anything that cuts anything at a child. any time. the interesting approach and i that's what they get paid for. was thinking in so many cases in let's be honest. recent history you have seen the they're not there for fairness. young in this country, the people under 30, for example, they're there as lobbyists for people over 50 years of age. who have led the way on issues like same-sex marriage, on issues like even obama's election to the presidency and so many cases. >> there's no question about that. do you think this is an area i think the problem is they also where young kids are going to say to their parents, get over have, as we know, enormous this nra fixation, be loyal to political sway, and so i think us kids, not to them? the question is for those members of congress who are >> i think that's exactly what going to vote on this, they have we're hearing now, and that's to decide how they're going to why you heard joe manchin from balance it, especially on the west virginia saying the same left, because at the end of the thing. day, i don't think anybody wants us to go over the cliff, but you had harry reid, who is quite pro-gun, out there making some they also want a deal -- >> i know people on the left favorable noise. that would like to dance on that cliff for years. a lot of these incoming democratic senators. they just love that cliff. the question is how long can you let me ask you, mike, some sustain that action? people just like trouble. we've seen in -- let me go to this, michael. you're laughing. >> i'm with you on that, brother. what is the hardest thing for i know the problem of passion. your side, the center right and right, to buy? the people on the far right, on the nra front, never lose their is it to cut that threshold down passion. to say $450,000 or somewhere they think about it every day of their lives. around in there where the they go to bed at night and put their heads on the pillow afraid somebody is going to take that gun away from them. president can say, okay, it doesn't raise as much revenue, normal people have other but it's more fair than what we interests like their spouses, got? >> i think that's part of it, chris, and i really think, and like their lives, their you and i have talked about this children, and even their

generalized politics isn't all before, that for a lot of my driven by one issue. conservative friends and myself included is, you know, what does the other side give? >> well, what we've seen is this congress operates under crisis. what are the spending cuts, real it requires a crisis, a fiscal spending cuts, substantive crisis, an international crisis to create any sort of an action spending cuts that are going to make a difference. that's going on. you didn't lose sight of this as part of this deal. it goes to what you were talking the only way you beat back a about with cpi and other aspects special interest group -- it's of the deal that are pieces that no coincidence that grover norquist of the tax pledge is can be put in play like a puzzle -- also on the board of the nra. >> you're opening the door to a the only way you beat back this little game on their side. is with focusing public attention like a laser. if they yell, oh, you're killing i just have a feeling if we wait me, mr. bill, you're killing me, you're killing me, and if it for dianne feinstein to really seems to hurt, then you introduce her assault weapons will say that's what we wanted. ban in january, we're all going to be talking about something we want nancy pelosi writhing on else. the house floor, and then we >> i think you're smart. thank you, dana milbank. feel that we've got somewhere. i get your point. speed could be important here. i agree with you. coming up, president obama and house speaker john boehner i think the democrats, not meet again at the white house, speaking for you completely, chris, but my theory is they and the two sides are inching want to see teeth marks in the closer to a deal on the cliff. necks of, what's his name, the the hard part of both men will be selling the deal to their own grover norquist crowd. they want him to hurt this week. thank you, michael steele. thank you, chris kofinis. up next, return of the birthers. what is in the water in arizona that would once again cause the state's officials to question president obama's being born in

the united states? they're at it again. this is "hardball," the place for politics. [ woman ] ring. ring. progresso. your soups are so awesomely delicious my husband and i can't stop eating 'em! what's...that... on your head? can curlers! tomato basil, potato with bacon... we've got a lot of empty cans. [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup.

back to "hardball." now to the "sideshow." once a birther, always a birther? it was supposed to be a formality when arizona's members of the electoral college cast their vote for the 2012 election for mitt romney. three of the romney electors while they were voting, three began questioning about whether the president's birth certificate is legitimate or not. tom morrissey said, i'm not satisfied with what i've seen. i think for somebody in the president's position to not have produced a document that looks more legitimate, i have a problem with that. according to a local news

report, college member dan askoli said he didn't think obama was properly vetted as a legitimate candidate. jan brewer refused to challenge those romney electors saying, the bottom line is everyone is entitled to their own opinion. i happen to disagree. next, south carolina state representative bill chumley filed a bill last week that called for the arrest of any public official, get this, found enforcing obama care. according to the proposal, any state official caught enforcing obama care, quote, must be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than two years or both. federal officials caught in the act of enforcing the health care law would receive still stiffer punishments. state representative chumley does not think this will be a hard sell. his words. finally, secretary of state hillary clinton is recovering this week after a bit of a health scare. she suffered a concussion while fainting due to dehydration. clinton had been scheduled to testify about benghazi this week, but deputies will testify in her place. enter john bolten, former u.n. ambassador under george w. bush. he's not convinced of clinton's

illness. >> you know, every foreign service officer in every foreign ministry in the world knows the phrase i'm about to use. when you don't want to go to a meeting or a conference or an event, you have a diplomatic illness. and this is a diplomatic illness to beat the band. >> victoria nuland responded saying bolton doesn't know what he's talking about. in bolton's case that's all a reasonable, safe assumption. up next, is the horror of newtown marking the beginning of the end of the nra's dominance over the issue of gun control in this country? you're watching "hardball," the place for politics.

welcome back to "hardball." has the political power of the nra peaked in the wake of the newtown shootings or are they just laying low waiting for the storm to pass. since friday they've been absent from the discussion on guns. today they released a statement saying they've been quiet, quote, as a matter of common decency, but they are

planning -- in fact, they have a press conference set for friday. according to "the new york times," it has an established precedent for responding, quote, over the years the nra has perfected its strategy for responding to mass shootings. lie low at first, then slow roll any legislative push for a response. has something fundamental shifted in the guns debate however since friday or will it be business as usual with the nra calling the shots? in a moment mayor michael nutter of philadelphia will be with us. he's the head of the united states conference of mayors, and mark glaze is executive director of mayors against illegal guns. you work strongly with the effort to try to reduce the number of guns. let's talk about the nra, the nemesis out there. >> right. >> they have been playing possum. they very nicely put out a press release saying they're very concerned and they've been trying to be sensitive, but they're up to something. i have a sense they're going to do nothing about gun control. they will probably talk about mental illness, a legitimate concern, but nothing to do with guns. >> this is the way they always

do it. what are they going to say? we have systematically whittled away even gun restrictions that nra members want to the point where there are more guns on the street than people. it's not a nice thing to say after a tragedy. the other thing to be aware of is it's not just the nra out there saying we have to make this about better mental health care. as you say, that's absolutely true, but when you hear democrats on the hill immediately turning to we have to care for the sick, they're right, but they're also avoiding the topic. the topic is congress has been absent from duty and -- >> let me shake you with this. here is a guy we had on last night, larry pratt. i read his op-ed in "usa today" yesterday. he's the executive director of a group called the gun owners of america, which sounds like just gun owners, but listen to his explanation of why he supports gun rights. it's rooted in his belief that it's a way to fight the government. let's watch. would this be a less free country if you couldn't have an assault rifle? >> yeah, because we have guns fundamentally protected by the

second amendment. >> wait a minute -- >> to control the government. we have guns in order to control the government. >> not just the right to use guns to protect your home, it's the right to use guns to take on your government. >> the government has been overboard. >> these are people who think of themselves in the lager as the whites used to say in south africa. some day the government is coming. a poplar government. they're not worrying about a coup d'etat. a popular government. i must be heavily armed and ready to fight the government with semiautomatic weapons which maybe i can convert to automatic when i have to. >> right. >> this isn't about hunting. this isn't about having personal protection. it's not about having a shotgun in case somebody tries to break in. this is about making war. isn't this called sedition? how's that far -- for a word? >> the nra, this isn't new stuff. the nra, a high ranking official, said as much in 1990, that this is not about defense or this is not about hunting.

this is not just about defense of the home, and we should be honest about that. this is about protecting ourselves from the government if we ever need to. >> you know, mayor nutter, michael nutter, i'm very proud to have him on, mayor nutter. the idea of the constitution which we can read, it's right in there, you have a right to have a musket because you have to be of a militia. militias are the people who are supposed to be carrying out the public order, protecting domestic tranquility, not creating trouble. they're supposed to be helping to protect against. these guys, these nuts come on and say i need my gun to fight my government. >> yeah. no, that's the police department, your state police, the national guard, and under -- i can't even imagine the circumstance. that's why we have the army. this is -- it's an absurdity, quite frankly, and the wonderful thing about america is people can believe whatever they want to believe, and i do respect that. what we're talking about is human life.

what we're talking about is protecting children and adults, and whether it's on the streets of philadelphia or new york or chicago or atlanta or in a classroom in newtown, connecticut, people want to be safe. you know, it's interesting, chris, that in the aftermath of 9/11, americans were willing to take on any number of what some might consider inconveniences or even, you know, some restriction on our freedoms because if you want to fly on an airplane, you have to take off almost all of your clothes, including your shoes. a guy had a bomb in his shoe, and now we're all taking our shoes off. so people want to be safe. this is not, as you said earlier, this is not about grandpop's shotgun. this is not about the tradition. and you're from philly, and we know that the traditions there are in pennsylvania. fathers and mothers take sons and daughters shooting deer or bear or birds or something like

that. these are people who kill people. it's the only purpose of these high capacity weapons. >> mayor -- >> weapons of mass destruction that are shooting down innocent children and other adults in cities all across the united states of america, and some reasonable regulations and some reasonable gun safety training and trigger locks and lockers and providing programs for those who may have some mental health challenges, but there is no reason for a civilian to have an automatic weapon. >> here is another point of view. you talked about people having a right to their own opinions. take a look at what u.s. congressman louie gohmert said about what would have prevented those deaths in newtown, connecticut. let's watch louie gohmert in action here. >> i wish to god she had had an m-4 in her office locked up so when she heard gunfire, she pulls it out and she didn't have to lunge heroically with nothing

in her hands, but she takes him out, takes his head off before he can kill those precious kids. >> mark, and then mayor nutter, the argument from the nra side, not yet official but from that point of view on the gun owner's side is if we only had more people with guns, including teachers and school officials packing heat during school hours, that we wouldn't have people coming in with impunity and kill them. >> we work with survivors all the time, including people who were in the theater in aurora. they will tell you exactly what police will tell you, which is that putting more guns in a dark theater, a street corner, most often in hands that have not been trained like police officers have, are not going to make a situation more safe. most of the public doesn't believe that. >> mayor, do you think it's right for teachers in philly or anywhere else to have guns? >> no one is suggesting that anywhere, and it's unfortunate that the gentleman thinks that. that comes from watching too much television. he probably also thinks that many people can shoot the gun out of someone's hand or, you

know, shoot it across the floor and all this other kind of stuff like butch cassidy and the sundance kid or something. that would have only led to more death and destruction, more bullets flying around, and whether it's in the classroom, whether it was in a theater, in tucson out in a parking lot. can you imagine if everybody literally as we call it at least here, if everybody is strapped and everybody is pulling out, you know, their weapon of choice, you're just going to have more bullets flying all around. it's about safety. no one has yet to be able to explain why someone needs the kind of high-powered weapons that that individual in connecticut had. now we're seeing more and more people with body armor. so he was prepared not only to do what he did apparently, which was to kill his own mother and then shoot down 20 kids and 6 adults, but then possibly take on the police, law enforcement who showed up with body armor before he killed himself. >> let's listen -- we have to

hear from the other side. let's hear the irrational side. here is wayne lapierre, who i used to think was okay. here is what he says about the president's conspiracy to take away our guns. here he was, this is wayne lapierre talking at the cpac convention last year. i think it was last year. let's listen to him. >> the president will offer the second amendment lip service and hit the campaign trail saying he's actually been good for the second amendment. but it's a big, fat, stinking lie, just like all the other lies that have come out of this corrupt administration. it's all part -- it's all part of a massive obama conspiracy to deceive voters and hide his true intentions, to destroy the second amendment in our country.

>> mark, he hadn't done a thing at this point. the terrible language. he's gotten worse over the years. this is the kind of language we were getting from newt gingrich and sununu, this personal attack on obama for things he didn't even do. >> i have three thoughts about that. the first is that any democrat in congress or around this country that accepts money from the nra ought to be ashamed of themselves after they say things like that about a democratic president. the second thing is that, you know, they said all of that after barack obama did nothing during his administration other than expand the gun rights. >> being barack obama was enough for them. we've got to go. this isn't even a debate anymore. mr. mayor -- >> chris, the one thing -- >> quickly. >> the one thing i would say quickly about him, i would dare him to say that to the parents of those children in connecticut or any other mother or father that's lost someone because of these weapons on the street. he should be ashamed of himself. >> thank you, mayor michael nutter of philadelphia, head of the u.s. conference of mayors and mark glazer. thank you.

we all remember how president obama bombed in that first debate with mitt romney. now we know just what the obama campaign did to try to control the damage after the first one. that's one of the new details out of the campaign in the new politico ebook, "the end of the line." it's authors join us next. this is "hardball," the place for politics.

the justice department will not charge paula broadwell with

cyber stalking. justice officials formally notified her attorneys today. broadwell is the woman at the center of the scandal that forced general david petraeus out at the cia. she wrote a biography on petraeus, but last month he stepped down after revealing he had an extramarital affair with her. we'll be right back.

we're back. the first presidential debate will go down in history books for president obama's disastrous performance. this week new details are emerging about the strategy and the decision making that led up to it and followed his poor performance in denver. that and other behind-the-scenes details are revealed in politico's new ebook called "the end of the line."

the co-authors are here with the inside scoop on the final weeks of the 2012 campaign. we, gentlemen. first of all, all i care about learning tonight, and i'm fascinated with it, is how could the president be so darn good in the second and third debates, and even biden was very good, very good, and the president was so terrible -- he even accused me of having a stroke i was so excited about how bad it was. as ax said, he didn't have to watch television to hear what i was saying on ms. glenn, i understand from an inside source what happened was they prepared him to go in tough, he had the attack lines and zingers, and a small circle got around him and said cool it. that was henry cabot lodge getting to nixon at the end and ruining his strategy at the last minute. so your thoughts, knowledge in reporting this, was there a strong, aggressive strategy in place that the president was then told not to use? >> it was actually henry cabot lodge again who did this one, too. no --

>> he's back. >> they went into this in august. they had sort of the bible of the debates are these memos that they build and then they alter, and in august they came up with a memo that was all about holding romney accountable for trying to move to the center. axelrod says we're not going to let him do this centrist riff, and then the 47% thing happened, and that small group around obama, axelrod particularly, anita dunn also, david plouffe less so a little bit ron klain a little less so said hold it. we've got to make this guy look presidential. romney is killing himself. we don't need to be -- the word they kept using was caustic. so they gave him a lot of contradictory advice. he himself was conflicted. and my sources say right before he left for that disastrous prep debate in nevada, look, i don't know what to do here. you're giving me contradictory advice. >> here is a tough question. maybe you don't know the answer

to. this tell me. john kerry was the head of the debate team. he was the guy playing him. was he part of the team that said get tough and the other guys overruled him later? what happened? what was his role in this? >> i would defer to glenn. but generally john kerry was not blamed by the president or the president's high command for his poor denver debate performance. they said kerry did his job effectively. and the proof of that, chris, the fact that john kerry is about to become secretary kerry instead of senator john kerry. but glenn can speak more to the kerry role. >> they had the early practices. were they tough? were they encouraging the president to go after the guy? was kerry a guy who said go after him or what? >> kerry was a fairly passive participant. he was more of an active than a screenwriter in this. >> i see. >> the thing they were really worry about. this is what i found fascinating. they thought kerry was going to play pattycake with obama in order to curry favor to become secretary of state. at the first couple of prep

sessions at the dnc in washington, he was really soft on obama. but it turned out obama is just not the kind of guy you can walk up to and call a failure to his face. i think that holds true with every president in these practice session. obama particularly. >> guess who did? romney did. tell me, check me on this. i had a sense he had never been talked to with such lack of deference for four years, and all of the sudden romney with all this cordiality and phony civility went in there and talked to him like a lesser being. and that drove the president crazy. your thoughts, then, the way he disdained him in that debate. >> will klain and axlerod and plouffe came up to kerry during some of the sessions and said look, you got to start hitting this guy. that's exactly what happened. in nevada, when they got to that disastrous debate prep in nevada, we report this 1:30-minute session was just a shellacking in which kerry got right into obama's face and called him a failure repeatedly.

they had expected it would arouse obama, wake him up, but it didn't. >> forever trying to figur let me go to john on this one. i'm being sarcastic because it drove me crazy. because he is so smart, the president. why are the romney people, who had all these incredibly paid staffers, the highest paid in the history of national campaigning, fehrnstrom seemed smart, neil newhouse, and they got the whole thing wrong. they told the guy he was going win. what happened at the end? you first, john. that. >> emphatically thought they were going to win. if anybody tells you that we didn't think we were going to win, they're lying to you. the candidate thought they were going to win. mrs. romney thought they were going to win. and the top staffers as well. they were convinced the polling they had internally was correct, and the public polling was overstating the nature of the democratic turnout. and they were wedded to that until the very end.

romney thought on election day that he was going to win. he travelled to ohio and pennsylvania. you saw these huge crowds waiting for him at final stops in those two states. and the sources i talked to said that he was definitely convinced that victory was at hand. let me just say real fast, chris, on the debate stuff, from my source on the romney side, i can answer the question to you about the preparation that romney had. one source said to me that rob portman, who is the prep guy for romney was throwing fastballs high and tight at romney. so you talk about someone who would act in a certain fashion to get the candidate prepared for the debate. i'm told that portman was really, really tough on romney, and offered no quarter at all. >> and actually, that wasn't a very good prep because the president wasn't that tough. >> not in that first debate. your thoughts. what was the biggest gem? >> the biggest glenn? no. well, i was fascinated by the debate stuff.

but one thing that john and i did in this piece was to sort of do this pretty minute-by-minute tick-tock of election night. because it was just weird the way that went down with the long delay. and one of the things that i found out is the obama team, probably with the exception of obama himself were really ticked off at team romney for taking 70, 80 minutes to wait. valerie jarrett was angry. axlerod was angry. and jim messina had to call matt rhodes, mitt romney's campaign messenger and had to send a text before romney called. >> i think he conceded in fine time. we did it while we were all there awake. john, quickly. >> two fast things. that is on election night, the romney campaign drafted remarks and considered having paul ryan go down to the podium to send everybody home until the next morning. that was a possibility considered until it became obvious that romney was going to lose. the second thing. in '08, there was a mormon documentarian. he cut a documentary made in

2010. the romney advisers spiked it. it's never seen the light of day because the romney high command thought it showed romney talking about his faith in a way that may be politically damaging for them. >> "called the end of the line" written by two great writers, jonathan martin and glenn thrush. we'll be right back. ring. rin. progresso. i just finished a bowl of your new light chicken pot pie soup and it's so rich and creamy... is it really 100 calories? let me put you on webcan... ...lean roasted chicken... and a creamy broth mmm i can still see you. [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup.

let me finish tonight where i started. the constitution of the united states commits this country to insuring the domestic

tranquility. that's an urgent need right now. we've had a quartet of shooting sprees in this presidency. no one on the right, by the way, has attacked the president or the any of them or all of them. why? the reason i gravely suspect is